DCIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNITY BUILDWELL LTD., NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal accepted the Revenue's request to withdraw the appeal due to low tax effect, but allowed them to file a Miscellaneous Application if certain conditions are met. The appeal was dismissed as infructuous.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The tax effect involved was less than Rs. 20,00,000/-, which is typically grounds for withdrawal of appeal as per departmental instructions.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be withdrawn due to low tax effect, considering departmental circulars and potential exceptions for specific types of cases.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. H.S. SIDHU & SH. O.P. KANT
Appellant by Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr.DR Respondent by Sh. Arun Kumar Jain, CA Date of hearing 30.11.2018 Date of pronouncement 30.11.2018 ORDER
PER O.P. KANT, AM:
The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 07.06.2018 passed by CIT(A)-9, New Delhi, pertaining to the assessment year 2013-14. It has been identified by the Registry that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than Rs.20,00,000/-.
During the course of hearing, the learned Sr. DR submitted that no doubt tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs, thus, bound by the departmental instruction, the appeal has to be withdrawn. However, attention was invited to para 10 of the Circular No. 3/2018, dated 11th July, 2018, which has been modified by Circular dated 20th August, 2018 and in terms of the said modification the Departmental Representatives made a prayer that permission to pray for recall of the order may be granted in case any of the conditions in the reports made available by the A.O. subsequently, show that the issues were required to be contested. The modified para is extracted hereunder: “10. Adverse judgments relating to the following issues should be contested on merits notwithstanding that the tax effect entailed is less than the monetary limits specified in para 3 above or there is no tax effect: (a) Where the Constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge, or (b) Where Board's order, Notification, Instruction or Circular has been held to be illegal or ultra vires, or (c) Where Revenue Audit objection in the case has been accepted by the Department, or (d) Where addition relates to undisclosed foreign income/undisclosed foreign assets (including financial assets)/ undisclosed foreign bank account. (e) Where addition is based on information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies such as CBI/ ED/ DRI/ SFIO/ Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). (f) Cases where prosecution has been filed by the Department and is pending in the Court. ” 3. Accepting the said request, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous. While so directing, it is made clear that the Department is at liberty to file Miscellaneous Application, if the tax effect is found to be more than the prescribed limit of Rs.20,00,000/- or any of the conditions etc., as available in the amendment carried out in para 10 of Circular No. 3/2018, dated 20.08.2018, is made out. 4. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 30th November, 2018.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026